What servo brand?

[jaguar bone]

Frankly I don't recall ever having a centering problem with analog servos. That is not to say there may be some practically unnoticeable issues - which may show up noticeably more on the larger surfaces of >25% craft?
Hey, I know I'm off base and behind because of how well the digital servos have been received in the hobby. BUT -I too am a subscriber of the fact there is no "prestige" in simply paying too much for something. If a $40 servo does the job (with reliability) then why spend $90? Especially when you have a large lake near the airfield -complete with gators!

Is programming the centering only needed on certain digital servo models? I'm resisting technology and really should just give in and go for it. I'm doing it on the power-plant!

I will be putting the DA 50R with a can muffler. The Zeonah will sit this one out - fer sure!
Thinking about updating my vintage 2000 radio too - but it is too difficult to get off the decision dime - mainly due to spread spectrum option factor. Well really, the JR is still serving me fine-n-dandy.
Oops, I have digressed from the main topic which was suppose to be BRAND.

[Tim G]

www.servotestsite.com

I think everyone on this thread should go to this site and read it all. Make up your one mind whether it is correct but my next servos will be hitec.

Tim

[plane]

Well Tim, you better read those torque curves more carefully. You'll notice the JR8411 isn't very far behind the 5955 and the 8611 (non A) is WAY stronger than a 5955.

As for the purported gear slop thing. I guarantee you that it makes no difference in precision flying.

Setup of the plane has the single largest affect on how well a plane tracks and flys.

The gear slop argument is to me, a mental thing. Does it really affect in flight performance? I have yet to be able to tell a difference.

On one of my older planes with well worn 8411's (had significant slop) which were setup for 3D rates I reset everything tight so I was using ALL of my resolution for pattern work. I now had much more torque, but the servos were much slower. When I flew the plane I couldn't tell any difference in horizontal flight, uplines, or inverted straight line flight. What I did notice was I had to totally change my setup to get the snap performance the same.

Once that task was done I couldn't tell any difference in snap performance. Even though the servos were slower I was able to compensate by reducing expo to get the same feel.

In the end gear slop is highly overrated AND for me I'll take the highest torque servo.

I'm an ex-Unlimited IMAC pilot (last competition was Fall 2002), but I'm comin' back! Albeit one class lower because I'm not as young as I used to be.

[Michael Glavin]

	Quote: Originally Posted by plane
	Well Tim, you better read those torque curves more carefully. You'll notice the JR8411 isn't very far behind the 5955 and the 8611 (non A) is WAY stronger than a 5955. As for the purported gear slop thing. I guarantee you that it makes no difference in precision flying. Setup of the plane has the single largest affect on how well a plane tracks and flys. The gear slop argument is to me, a mental thing. Does it really affect in flight performance? I have yet to be able to tell a difference. On one of my older planes with well worn 8411's (had significant slop) which were setup for 3D rates I reset everything tight so I was using ALL of my resolution for pattern work. I now had much more torque, but the servos were much slower. When I flew the plane I couldn't tell any difference in horizontal flight, uplines, or inverted straight line flight. What I did notice was I had to totally change my setup to get the snap performance the same. Once that task was done I couldn't tell any difference in snap performance. Even though the servos were slower I was able to compensate by reducing expo to get the same feel. In the end gear slop is highly overrated AND for me I'll take the highest torque servo. I'm an ex-Unlimited IMAC pilot (last competition was Fall 2002), but I'm comin' back! Albeit one class lower because I'm not as young as I used to be.

The Servo test site performance curve test was performed with 8611A’s… You missed a few serious proponents in the evaluation of the realized torque of the 8611’s. First and foremost IMO is the simple fact that three test mule servos smoked developing said torque values in short order and another broke the gear-train while they all required a massive control signal error signal to develop same. What this means in laymen’s terms is 150 micro-second error signal is required against a stalled load to generate the 300 ounce-in plus torque value or in other words lets say we want to hold the servo at neutral which should equate to a control signal pulse-width of say 1500us while sustaining 300oz-in the servo would require a control signal of 1650us at approximately 25 degrees servo angle deflection to hold the neutral position. I’d like to see anyone duplicate the requirements to realize said torque value in a model airplane.

While the gear slop may not be a factor for you or some I guarantee those that can feel the difference and know what precision feels like believe this is a HUGE factor… Gear slop is and always be a factor and its unfathomable IMO that you don’t notice a difference.

System resolution is realized unilaterally with a proper 3D or precision set-up as in either case you should be using maximum servo angle (120 degrees) and maximum ATV values. The primary notable difference is the throw realized of the two setups. Torque or more specifically force values are generally higher with precision setups due to there shorter control arms and there is a slight speed difference as shorter servo arms travel faster end to end than longer servo arms and the travel arcs thereof. Servo TORQUE values never change, however FORCE values are a factor of arm length, anything longer than a one inch servo arm skews the OEM specification. For instance a 1.5” servo arm will reduce the servo FORCE value by 50%, but we can make up for the short coming by using an equal length or better yet a longer control arm. The realized TORQUE value of or at the surface is another consideration.

[Tim G]

Michael

Thanks for the response. Plane if I were only interested in torque I would prefer a bigger case anyway.

Tim

[JimC-MD]

Deleted due to edited material in previous posts

[randy racer]

are any of you hitec guys seeing any problems with the 5955's? i am planning on going with them in my next plane i think. i am not asking if they are better than the other brands just if there are any problems to look for.

randy

[Pale Rider]

I would like to know that as well

[Flatlandman]

Since me and 3 of my close friends went to the hitec 5955 we have had no problems. Mine are out lasting the 8611 servos i had on my ailerons.

[Vic3D]

I haven't read about a single problem with 5955's. I have those in my 260 and they rock.

[randy racer]

thanks guys, i think i will give them a try. my luck with one of the other top brands has beed very bad lately so i am hoping for some thing better with hitec.

thanks again

randy racer

[adrian]

almost two years in many applications - works well - also the 5945/85 works great!!

[Pale Rider]

For a 28-30% plane, are the stock arms that come with the h955's ok or should I go SWB..Ive always used SWB in the past but if the stock arms are good then Ill just use 'em..

[Flyinrazrback]

The stock arms are ok, they are not tapped for 4-40, and they are only about 1" long, so I would use the swb or airwild 1.25"

[Pale Rider]

	Quote: Originally Posted by Flyinrazrback
	The stock arms are ok, they are not tapped for 4-40, and they are only about 1" long, so I would use the swb or airwild 1.25"

Yea thats what I figured..how are the Airwild compared to SWb ?